gun control

Uncategorized

Colorado Sheriff Within Rights Not To Enforce New Gun Control Laws

March 19, 2013 by 4 Comments

Sheriff John Cooke of Weld County, Colorado has been out front in his opposition to the new gun control laws in that state. He led a delegation of sheriffs in testifying against the bills before the Colorado legislature earlier this month. Now he has announced that he doesn’t plan to enforce the new laws – and he is within the letter of the law.

“Why put the effort into enforcing a law that is unenforceable?” Cooke told The Denver Post on Monday. “With all of the other crimes that are going on, I don’t have the manpower, the resources or the desire to enforce laws like that.”

Cooke said this is the first time in his law enforcement career that he has made the decision to not enforce a law.

However, Cooke said, if a person who uses a gun outfitted with a magazine able to hold more than 15 rounds in a crime, that person will be charged under the new law.

Both Dave Kopel, a professor at the University of Denver law school, and Richard Collins, a professor at the University of Colorado law school, agree that it is within a sheriff’s prerogative to decide which laws are given priority for enforcement.

From Dave Kopel:

“His primary obligation is to obey the U.S. Constitution and the Colorado Constitution, and he appears to be especially conscientious in making sure he does so,” Kopel said.

While it may be one of the first instances related to gun-control measures, sheriffs in the past have refused to uphold laws they did not agree with, such as prohibition, Jim Crow and immigration, Kopel said.

From Richard Collins:

“He couldn’t be punished for not upholding these laws, but he could be ordered by the court to uphold them,” said Richard Collins, a University of Colorado at Boulder law professor. “Whether anyone would bring a lawsuit to get the court to order him is pretty uncertain.”

Given that Sheriff Cooke is one of the 62 elected (out of 64 total) sheriffs in Colorado, Kopel noted that the primary penalty for noncompliance would be either a recall or to be voted out of office so long as he is faithful to both the US and Colorado constitution.

Of course this just galls the gun prohibitionists in the Colorado legislature.

State Sen. Morgan Carroll, D-Aurora, Senate sponsor of the universal-background-checks bill, said a sheriff unwilling or unable to fulfill the duties of the position should step down.

“They are putting politics above their job,” she said.

That last statement is particularly rich coming from the likes of Sen. Carroll who has her eyes set on the governor’s office.

var _gaq = _gaq || [];
_gaq.push([‘_setAccount’, ‘UA-39430075-1’]);
_gaq.push([‘_trackPageview’]);

(function() {
var ga = document.createElement(‘script’); ga.type = ‘text/javascript’; ga.async = true;
ga.src = (‘https:’ == document.location.protocol ? ‘https://ssl’ : ‘http://www’) + ‘.google-analytics.com/ga.js’;
var s = document.getElementsByTagName(‘script’)[0]; s.parentNode.insertBefore(ga, s);
})();

Uncategorized

You Go, Girl!

March 13, 2013 by 2 Comments

Rep. Jim Moran (D-VA), one of the more notorious gun prohibitionists in Congress, held a town hall meeting yesterday entitled, “Preventing Another Newtown: A Conversation on Gun Violence in America.”

The panel included such gun control luminaries as CSGV’s Josh Horwitz and the Brady Campaign Legal Project’s Jonathan Lowy. There were no one but two people affiliated with Mayor Bloomberg and his Illegal Mayors – former ATF Special Agent David Chipman and Karen Marangi of the Raben Group, their PR firm.

Given this lineup, I’m sure Rep. Moran was a little surprised when the young and very attractive Celia Bigelow confronted him in the Q&A session. She asked why he wasn’t “pro-choice when it came to self-defense for women”. His response – next question.

Uncategorized

Is This A False Flag Operation?

March 13, 2013 by 5 Comments

In my email this evening I got an email entitled, “Gun Control and the Cultural Divide.” It was from the “Southern Conservative Newsletter” and discussed what they termed Northern and Southern views on guns.

It starts off by saying:

To understand the gun debate, one must know how each side comes to understand guns in the first place. As federal and local lawmakers consider new gun restrictions on law-abiding citizens, how do we shape the debate to actually solve problems such as the safety of our children and the reduction of crime – which are the stated purpose of all gun control efforts?

The email says in the South everyone grew up with guns and if you were part of the gun culture you were left out.  Of course, even in the South, not everyone grows up with guns.

When it comes to discussing the gun culture of the North, this email starts talking about Newtown and how gun control measures are a reactionary response. I can agree with that but I also know that response is not “Northern” but more urban in character. While still “discussing” the gun culture of the North, this email says we as Southerners can’t just “cross our arms and just say ‘no’ to any discussion of keeping guns away from criminals and the mentally disturbed” or we’ll be shut out of the discussion.

Now I don’t see anyone in the gun culture, Southern or Northern, just crossing our arms and saying “no” to keeping firearms out of the hands of criminals or the mentally ill. In fact, I see most of the impetus on the mental health front coming from us and not the gun prohibitionists.

The email concludes by saying:

Long prison sentences for those using a gun in a crime, mental health and criminal checks for those wishing to purchase a gun, safety courses – all of these are reasonable ways politicians can reduce criminal use of firearms and protect rights of those who use guns lawfully. We must be the ones to tell them, but we must first understand the nature and thought process of those on the other side of the debate.

Since when did anyone need a “safety course” to enjoy their enumerated rights under the Constitution? And are those “mental health and criminal checks” for firearms purchases meant just for those buying from a dealer or do they extend to private sales as well?

The email has buttons to either signup for the newsletter or to forward it. Both buttons seem to designed to capture email addresses. What makes me even more suspicious of this email is that if you Google “Southern Conservative Newsletter”, you get five results. They are all links to a blog by a liberal Floridian called The Spencerian who is dismissive of the newsletter.

The email address given is for the domain “southernconservativenewsletter.com”. The only problem is that this domain is a parked domain by GoDaddy.Com and they are offering it up for sale.

Call me paranoid or call me suspicious but I don’t trust any so-called conservative newsletter pushing background checks and safety courses in order to own a firearm.

If anyone has heard of this bunch, I’d like to know more.

Uncategorized

Someone Needs To Do Some Explaining

March 1, 2013 by 4 Comments

Rep. Mitch Greenlick (D-Portland) is the primary sponsor of Oregon HB 3200. This bill, if passed, is a draconian gun control measure which would have drastic consequences.

From the Oregon Firearms Federation email alert:

HB 3200 not only bans most modern guns and magazines, it allows warrantless searches of your home, requires background checks and registration for a firearm you already own and as-of-yet undefined storage requirements. We say “a firearm” because even if you comply with the restrictions in this bill you may still only own one.

Section 4 of HB 3200 is the kicker. This section requires you to register your firearm and magazines owned before the bill’s passage and to undergo a new background check. It then goes on to say:

(4) A person may not register more than one assault weapon and
three large capacity magazines under this section. Additional
assault weapons and large capacity magazines must be disposed of
in the manner specified in section 3 of this 2013 Act.
(5) A registered owner of an assault weapon or large capacity
magazine is required to:
(a) Securely store the assault weapon or large capacity
magazine pursuant to rules and regulations adopted by the
department;
(b) Allow an inspector from the department to inspect the
storage of assault weapons and large capacity magazines to ensure
compliance with this subsection;

Here is where it gets really curious. Rep. Greenlick who, mind you, is the primary sponsor and the one who introduced HB 3200, disagrees with parts of the bill he introduced.

From The Oregonian:

Even Rep. Mitch Greenlick, D-Portland, the chief sponsor of House Bill 3200, said the bill as introduced goes too far in not only banning the sale of these weapons but in limiting each gun owner to continue possessing just one of these firearms.

Greenlick said he also disagrees with a provision that would allow the state police to investigate gun owners who possess one of these weapons to make sure they are safely stored.

“In its current form, it’s a pretty flawed bill,” said Greenlick, adding that “I don’t think [the bill] is in play.”

As The Riddler of Batman fame would say, so riddle me this Rep. Greenlick, did you not know what was in the bill when you introduced it and, if not, why not?

Could this piece of legislation that has Oregon Ceasefire swooning be another piece of legislation written by Mayor Bloomberg and his Illegal Mayors and dropped by parachute into the hands of willing naifs in the Oregon Legislative Assembly?

Let’s just say I wouldn’t be surprised.

Uncategorized

Newest Gun-Related Legislation In Congress (Updated)

February 26, 2013 by 2 Comments

I have been remiss in updating the list of newly introduced legislation dealing with firearms and firearm ownership. Below are the bills that have been introduced in the House of Representatives since February 5th and the Senate since January 31st. They include both pro-gun rights bills and others that would seek to trample on the Second Amendment.

House of Representatives

HR 538 – Rep. Eliot Engel (D-NY)
PLEA Act
To protect the Nation’s law enforcement officers by banning the
Five-seveN Pistol and 5.7 x 28mm SS190, SS192, SS195LF, SS196, and SS197
cartridges, testing handguns and ammunition for capability to penetrate
body armor, and prohibiting the manufacture, importation, sale, or
purchase of such handguns or ammunition by civilians.
Referred to House Judiciary Committee

HR 575 – Rep. Steve Stockman (R-TX)
Second Amendment Protection Act of 2013
To express the sense of the Congress that the United States should not
adopt any treaty that poses a threat to national sovereignty or abridges
any rights guaranteed by the United States Constitution, such as the
right to keep and bear arms, and to withhold funding from the United
Nations unless the President certifies that the United Nations has not
taken action to restrict, attempt to restrict, or otherwise adversely
infringe upon the rights of individuals in the United States to keep and
bear arms, or abridge any of the other constitutionally protected
rights of citizens of the United States.
Referred to House Foreign Affairs Committee

HR 577 – Rep. Steve Stockman (R-TX)
Veterans Second Amendment Protection Act
To amend title 38, United States Code, to clarify the conditions under
which certain persons may be treated as adjudicated mentally incompetent
for certain purposes.
Referred to House Committee on Veterans Affairs Subcommittee on Disability Assistance and Memorial Affairs

HR 578 – Rep. Marlin Stutzman (R-IN)
Co-sponsors:
Rep Brady, Kevin [R-TX] – 2/14/2013
Rep Bucshon, Larry [R-IN] – 2/12/2013
Rep Griffin, Tim [R-AR] – 2/14/2013
Rep Hartzler, Vicky [R-MO] – 2/12/2013
Rep Jordan, Jim [R-OH] – 2/14/2013
Rep LaMalfa, Doug [R-CA] – 2/14/2013
Rep Lucas, Frank D. [R-OK] – 2/13/2013
Rep Meadows, Mark [R-NC] – 2/14/2013
Rep Palazzo, Steven M. [R-MS] – 2/13/2013
Rep Stockman, Steve [R-TX] – 2/12/2013
Rep Thornberry, Mac [R-TX] – 2/12/2013
Rep Walberg, Tim [R-MI] – 2/14/2013
Rep Wilson, Joe [R-SC] – 2/14/2013
Respecting States’ Rights and Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2013
To allow reciprocity for the carrying of certain concealed firearms.
Referred to House Judiciary Committee

HR 602 – Rep. Jeff Miller (R-FL)
Veterans 2nd Amendment Protection Act
To amend title 38, United States Code, to clarify the conditions under
which certain persons may be treated as adjudicated mentally incompetent
for certain purposes.
Referred to House Committee on Veterans Affairs Subcommittee on Disability Assistance and Memorial Affairs

HR 619 – Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-NY)
Keep Kids Safe Act of 2013 
To amend title 18, United States Code, to place limitations on the
possession, sale, and other disposition of a firearm by persons
convicted of misdemeanor sex offenses against children.
Referred to House Judiciary Committee

HR 661 – Rep. Barbara Lee (D-CA)
Co-sponsors:
Rep DeLauro, Rosa L. [D-CT]
– 2/13/2013

Rep Farr, Sam [D-CA]
– 2/13/2013

Rep Fattah, Chaka [D-PA]
– 2/13/2013

Rep Grijalva, Raul M. [D-AZ]
– 2/14/2013

Rep Holt, Rush [D-NJ]
– 2/14/2013

Rep Honda, Michael M. [D-CA]
– 2/13/2013

Rep Lowey, Nita M. [D-NY]
– 2/13/2013

Rep McCollum, Betty [D-MN]
– 2/13/2013

Rep Moran, James P. [D-VA]
– 2/13/2013

Rep Pingree, Chellie [D-ME]
– 2/13/2013

Rep Price, David E. [D-NC]
– 2/13/2013

Rep Quigley, Mike [D-IL]
– 2/13/2013

Rep Roybal-Allard, Lucille [D-CA]
– 2/13/2013

Rep Rush, Bobby L. [D-IL]
– 2/14/2013

Rep Schiff, Adam B. [D-CA]
– 2/13/2013

Rep Serrano, Jose E. [D-NY]
– 2/13/2013
Tiahrt Restrictions Repeal Act  
To repeal certain impediments to the administration of the firearms laws.
Referred to House Judiciary Committee

HR 720 – Rep. Peter King (R-NY)
Co-sponsors:
Rep Capuano, Michael E. [D-MA]
– 2/14/2013

Rep Cicilline, David N. [D-RI]
– 2/14/2013

Rep Deutch, Theodore E. [D-FL]
– 2/14/2013

Rep Engel, Eliot L. [D-NY]
– 2/14/2013

Rep Farr, Sam [D-CA]
– 2/14/2013

Rep Grimm, Michael G. [R-NY]
– 2/14/2013

Rep Himes, James A. [D-CT]
– 2/14/2013

Rep Holt, Rush [D-NJ]
– 2/14/2013

Rep Israel, Steve [D-NY]
– 2/14/2013

Rep McGovern, James P. [D-MA]
– 2/14/2013

Rep Moran, James P. [D-VA]
– 2/14/2013

Rep Norton, Eleanor Holmes [D-DC]
– 2/14/2013

Rep Pierluisi, Pedro R. [D-PR]
– 2/14/2013

Rep Quigley, Mike [D-IL]
– 2/14/2013

Rep Rangel, Charles B. [D-NY]
– 2/14/2013

Rep Slaughter, Louise McIntosh [D-NY]
– 2/14/2013

Rep Waxman, Henry A. [D-CA]
– 2/14/2013
To increase public safety by permitting the Attorney General to deny the
transfer of a firearm or the issuance of firearms or explosives
licenses to a known or suspected dangerous terrorist.
Referred to House Judiciary Committee

HR 722 – Rep. Peter King (R-NY)
Co-sponsors:
Rep Bishop, Timothy H. [D-NY]
– 2/14/2013

Rep Farr, Sam [D-CA]
– 2/14/2013

Rep Moran, James P. [D-VA]
– 2/14/2013

Rep Rangel, Charles B. [D-NY]
– 2/14/2013
To combat illegal gun trafficking, and for other purposes. 
Referred to House Judiciary Committee

HR 793 – Rep. Linda Sanchez (D-CA)
Co-sponsors:
Rep Bishop, Timothy H. [D-NY] – 2/15/2013
Rep Cardenas, Tony [D-CA] – 2/15/2013
Rep Clay, Wm. Lacy [D-MO] – 2/15/2013
Rep DeLauro, Rosa L. [D-CT] – 2/15/2013
Rep Edwards, Donna F. [D-MD] – 2/15/2013
Rep Grijalva, Raul M. [D-AZ] – 2/15/2013
Rep Hahn, Janice [D-CA] – 2/15/2013
Rep Lee, Barbara [D-CA] – 2/15/2013
Rep Maloney, Carolyn B. [D-NY] – 2/15/2013
Rep Matsui, Doris O. [D-CA] – 2/15/2013
Rep McGovern, James P. [D-MA] – 2/15/2013
Rep Napolitano, Grace F. [D-CA] – 2/15/2013
Rep Norton, Eleanor Holmes [D-DC] – 2/15/2013
Rep Pascrell, Bill, Jr. [D-NJ] – 2/15/2013
Rep Roybal-Allard, Lucille [D-CA] – 2/15/2013
Rep Rush, Bobby L. [D-IL] – 2/15/2013
Rep Sires, Albio [D-NJ] – 2/15/2013
Rep Vargas, Juan [D-CA] – 2/15/2013
To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to impose an excise tax on
concealable firearms and to require the Attorney General to establish a
firearms buyback grant program. 


Referred to House Judiciary Committee and to House Ways and Means Committee

Senate

S 261 – Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA)
Co-sponsors:
Sen Boxer, Barbara [D-CA]
– 2/7/2013

Sen Lautenberg, Frank R. [D-NJ]
– 2/7/2013

Sen Menendez, Robert [D-NJ]
– 2/7/2013

Sen Schumer, Charles E. [D-NY]
– 2/7/2013

Sen Whitehouse, Sheldon [D-RI]
– 2/7/2013
No Firearms for Foreign Felons Act of 2013  
To establish and clarify that Congress does not authorize persons
convicted of dangerous crimes in foreign courts to freely possess
firearms in the United States.
Referred to Senate Judiciary Committee

UPDATE: Here is one more to add to the list from Chuck Schumer. Interestingly enough, his office hasn’t released any sort of press release on the bill. Given that the most dangerous place in DC figuratively is between Chuck Schumer and a TV camera, this is remarkable.

S 374 – Sen. Charles Schumer (D-NY)
A bill to ensure that all individuals who should be prohibited from
buying a firearm are listed in the national instant criminal background
check system and require a background check for every firearm sale.
Referred to Senate Judiciary Committee

Uncategorized

GRNC – Five Phone Calls For Freedom

February 21, 2013 by 3 Comments

In response to news that Obama’s former campaign organization would be having a “National Day of Action” in support of gun control on February 22nd, Grass Roots North Carolina asks that people make five phone calls on February 25th and 26th. They are calling this Five Phone Calls for Freedom.


On Feb. 25 & 26, make ‘Five Phone Calls for Freedom’

Friday, February 22, will witness an unprecedented attack on your rights as Obama mobilizes his army of left-wing activists to push for federal gun bans. “Roll Call” recently ran a piece entitled, “Organizing for America Plans ‘National Day of Action’ to Mobilize Grass Roots on Guns.” It went on to say:

“Organizing for Action is planning its first official mobilization in support of President Barack Obama’s proposals to curtail gun violence. The nonprofit that inherited Obama’s campaign infrastructure and 2 million strong volunteer army will hold a ‘national day of action’ on Feb. 22, officials said Tuesday.”

If that doesn’t scare you, it should

What you are seeing is “Barry the Community Organizer” doing what he does best: Attacking your rights using millions of rabid radicals who will stoop to any level of deceit in order to control you. The grass roots initiative began with his State of the Union address, in which he packed the house with families of victims of mass killings. Next, Obama went on the road to sell his plan at schools in Atlanta and elsewhere.

Now MoveOn.org is joining the fray by running TV ads that proclaim, “The NRA doesn’t speak for me.” In case you didn’t know it, these are the same folks that you brought you “ACORN”; MoveOn.org is funded by the left wing “Tides Foundation” which is itself funded by none other than freedom-hating billionaire George Soros.

Your voice needed now more than ever

You have politicians scared. As a founding member of the Coalition to Stop the Gun Ban, which now comprises 38 state and national organizations, GRNC members have been blasting Congress with a coordinated message that we will punish any legislator who supports gun control. So to counter your influence, “Barry” plans to “out-grassroots” you. Will you let him?

IMMEDIATE ACTION REQUIRED!

Make ‘Five Phone Calls for Freedom’

To fight back against this left wing attack, we are asking millions of Second Amendment supporters, represented by the Coalition and others, to deliver a loud and clear message to Congress by making 5 phone calls on Monday and Tuesday (Feb. 25 & 26). Please note that we said CALL, not email. We want millions of voices to ring through the congressional switchboard, so please note that you might have to try several times to get through.

Specifically, we are asking you to call:

  1. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell at 202-224-2541

  2. House Speaker John Boehner at 202-225-0600

  3. Senator Richard Burr at 202-224-3154

  4. Senator Kay Hagan at 202-224-6342

  5. Your representative to the U.S. House. To identify your US House representative, go to: http://www.house.gov/representatives/ and then enter your zip code in the upper right corner of the page.

DELIVER THIS MESSAGE

Give congressional staff 3 simple talking points:

  1. Nothing about the federal proposals is acceptable – not banning semi-automatic firearms and magazines, not expanding the list of people prohibited from owning guns, and not registering private gun sales via the National Instant Check System;

  2. Because “compromise” means losing freedom, you will not “compromise” on this issue, including any “lite” version of registering private sales through the National Instant Check System; and

  3. As a member of one of the organizations comprising the National Coalition to Stop the Gun Ban, you will support coordinated Coalition action against any legislator who supports gun control.

ADDITIONAL ACTION

If you have additional time, please CALL other US House representatives in the North Carolina delegation, including:

Rep. G. K. Butterfield, Jr. (D – 01) 202-225-3101

Rep. Renee L. Ellmers (R – 02) 202-225-4531

Rep. Walter B. Jones, Jr. (R – 03) 202-225-3415

Rep. David Price (D – 04) 202-225-1784

Rep. Virginia Foxx (R – 05) 202-225-2071

Rep. Howard Coble (R – 06) 202-225-3065

Rep. Mike McIntyre (D – 07) 202-225-2731

Rep. Richard Hudson (R – 08) 202-225-3715

Rep. Robert Pittenger (R – 09) 202-225-1976

Rep. Patrick McHenry (R – 10) 202-225-2576

Rep. Mark Meadows (R-11) 202-225-6401

Rep. Mel Watt (D – 12) 202-225-1510

Rep. George Holding (R – 13) 202-225-3032

Uncategorized

About That Right To Choose

February 21, 2013 by 1 Comment

The commentators on TheBlaze’s Real News discussed whether liberal men are being hypocritical. While most of them support a woman’s right to choose an abortion, very few of them support a woman’s right to choose her method of self-defense. They termed this the New Leftist Patriarchy.

Will Cain started the discussion out speaking of how the gun control debate is being framed by the political elite and the media. He made a very astute point when he said that while gun prohibitionists (my words) question why you need a firearm (or a particular type of firearm), the real question in a free society is why you need to take it away. I think this a point that we in the gun rights community need to make more often.

The remainder of the clip deals with the fallout from Rep. Joe Salazar of Colorado’s absurd statements regarding the need for a gun to prevent rape.

Uncategorized

Sen. Kay Hagan Goes Wobbly On Background Checks

February 20, 2013 by 2 Comments

Sen. Kay Hagan (D-NC) was interviewed by Chris Fitzsimon of NC Policy Watch on a number of issues. Among the issues was gun control and where she stood on President Obama’s proposals. NC Policy Watch is a project of the NC Justice Center which is a self-described “progressive” organization.

In her comments in the interview with Fitzsimon, Hagan appears to commit to supporting universal background checks without actually committing to them. In other words, she’s trying to play both sides of the debate. Her comments on gun control begin near the 5:30 mark and run for about a minute. It should be noted that Hagan is one of the most at-risk Democrat incumbents in the Senate.

Grass Roots North Carolina has called her out on her statements and issued an alert asking constituents to email and/or write Hagan.


Demonstrating poor judgment characteristic of an anti-freedom politician who earned only a GRNC 1-star evaluation, Senator Kay Hagan recently gave a radio interview with left-wing activist, Chris Fitzsimon, Director of NC Policy Watch, a “progressive” policy organization.

During this ranging interview, which turns to gun control at about six minutes, Hagan made clear her support of expanded background checks that are a key part of the Obama/Biden/Feinstein gun ban. Hagan claims such checks represent a “positive move” toward keeping “guns out of criminals’ hands”.

What “universal background checks” actually are is a mechanism for gun registration, the necessary prelude to confiscation. Usefulness of such checks in stopping crime is vanishingly rare. According to economist and social scientist John Lott, Jr., purchases prevented by the current NICS system are almost always false-positives, serving only to harass and hinder the law-abiding.

Sen. Hagan clearly needs to be reminded that NC gun owners will tolerate NO COMPROMISE with Obama’s gun ban.

IMMEDIATE ACTION REQUIRED!

Call AND email Sen. Hagan: Tell her background checks only harass the law-abiding, and NO COMPROMISE is acceptable.

CONTACT INFO

Call Hagan’s Office: 202-224-6342

Email Hagan: Use her webform: http://www.hagan.senate.gov/contact/

DELIVER THIS MESSAGE

Suggested Subject: “No Compromise on Private Sales!”

Dear Senator Hagan:

You recently informed liberal activist Chris Fitzsimon that you believe “universal background checks” will effectively keep guns out of the wrong hands.

You should be aware that we already have an extensive background check system, “National Instant Background Check System” (NICS), which almost never results in identifying criminals attempting to purchase guns. Almost all NICS denials are false-positives and only serve to inconvenience and infringe on the rights of law-abiding gun owners.

Proposed expansion of background checks is nothing more than another “feel good” measure that will do nothing to prevent the type of violent crime perpetrated within “Gun Free Zones” that have been created by gun control extremists like Fitzsimon.

As my Senator you need to understand that NC gun owners and I will not tolerate any compromise on or cooperation with Obama’s misguided gun-ban agenda. I will be monitoring your actions via Grass Roots North Carolina legislative alerts.

Respectfully,

Uncategorized

Sounds Like A Put Up Job To Me

February 16, 2013 by 3 Comments

Colorado Rep. Joe Salazar (D-Thornton) and other Democrats in the Colorado House are saying they have been getting death threats over their stance on gun control.

Color me skeptical. It has all the earmarks of a modern day Reichstag fire incident. That, for those don’t remember their history, was a put up event staged by Hitler as the pretext for getting an emergency decree which suspended civil liberties in Germany.

Given how the Democrats love to use victimhood as the pretext for pushing legislation, what could be better when discussing gun control measures than playing the victim against those evil, angry, and deranged gun owners who want to bitterly cling to their guns and “high capacity” magazines.

Uncategorized

From The NJ Second Amendment Society

February 15, 2013 by

The New Jersey Law and Public Safety Committee held hearings yesterday on 23 gun control bills and the pushed all of the bills out of committee to the full house. As the release below from the NJ Second Amendment Society makes clear, it was the intention of the committee chairman that all of these bills would pass his committee.


NJ LAW AND PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE PUSHES THROUGH ANTI FREEDOM BILLS DESPITE OVERWHELMING OPPOSITION

By Rich Petkevis
NJ2AS Media Relations
press@nj2as.com

On Wednesday, February 13, 2013, the New Jersey Law and Public Safety Committee heard testimony on 24 anti freedom bills. Approximately 500 liberty minded people showed up to testify against these bills, however only about 200 actually made it into the State House. The other 300 were forced to stay outside during the hearings. Around a half dozen people were on hand to testify in favor of the proposed legislation.

The day started with Committee Chair ASM Charles Mainor declaring all bills would move out of committee and into the general assembly. This bold statement set the tone for the day. As the hearing got under way, it was evident that the chairman and the majority of the committee had no plans on listening to any of those who testified against the bills. The first two pieces of legislation were then hurried through, and only 5 people allowed to testify on each. It was brought to the attention of ASM Mainor that more than 5 people wanted to testify on these bills, and explained that people were told to write “testify on all” instead of individually listing each bill when registering for the day. ASM Mainor then offered to allow testimony after the committee voted on the bills, further insulting the majority of the crowd. The reaction of the crowd forced Mainor to allow people to testify on all the bills, then voting would happen at the end of the day.

Several members of the NJ2AS, ANJRPC, various Tea Party organizations, and other liberty minded citizens came up to testify. People were told there was a two minute time limit, however anyone who went up to speak in favor of the rights restricting legislation were pretty much allowed to talk as long as they wanted. Anyone testifying against the bills were held strictly to the two minute time limit. Toward the end of the day, a Navy Veteran stood up to testify, and called out ASM Mainor for not listening to her being he was having a sidebar conversation when she tried to speak. Mainor quickly shouted back at her, “I am going to conduct my meeting my way, your time is up” drawing much anger from the crowd.

It was a long day, and all of the bills left committee and are headed to the NJ general assembly for vote sometime next week. There was one bill that stood to protect the privacy of NJ firearms owners, A3788 which exempts firearms records from NJ’s open public records law.

NJ2AS urges all freedom loving, liberty minded citizens who oppose this legislation to call, email, and fax New Jersey’s elected members of the Legislature and urge them to vote NO on these bills.

New Jersey gun bills introduced since January 1, 2013 can be found at http://www.firearmspolicy.org/newjersey.

The committee chairman, Assemblyman Charles Mainor, is also Detective Mainor of the Jersey City Police Department. It would be interesting to know if he acts as much like thug when he’s on the streets of Jersey City as he does in running his committee.